Candidates and fiscal responsibility

[iplaw]

The Council for Citizens against Government Waste have now posted their review of Congress for 2007.  They evaluated the 35 most wasteful pork projects of 2007 and how every candidate voted on those projects.  A score of 100% percent means they voted against all projects and likewise a score of 0% means they voted for all the projects.

Obama = 18%
Biden = 0%
McCain = 100%

http://councilfor.cagw.org/site/DocServer/2007_Senate_Ratings_Final.pdf?docID=3282

[pmcalk]

^^Fyi, for those that don't know who CCAGW is, they are a lobbying group that lobbies on behalf of the tobaco industry and that was involved in a fraud scheme with Abramoff.

They have a very cozy relationship with McCain, and have twice supported him and donated large amounts of money to his campaign.

[iplaw]

Oh no! Not evil tobacco...



You're candidates have never met a pork project they could resist.   ***** about the source all you want, but voting records are voting records.

[we vs us]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

Oh no! Not evil tobacco...



You're candidates have never met a pork project they could resist.   ***** about the source all you want, but voting records are voting records.

ie. "You're wrong wrong wrong and I can't hear you because I have my fingers in my ears. Nyaaaaah!"

[iplaw]

Speaking of willful ignorance, did you bother to look into either of your candidate's voting records on wasteful projects or pork in general?

Neither Obama nor Biden have seen a pork project that didn't give them wood.

Ignorance is bliss I suppose.

[pmcalk]

A vote may be a vote, but "waste" is always in the eyes of the beholder.

Was it stopping "waste" to vote to out source the Air Force to a European company, costing tens of thousands of jobs here in the US?  McCain and CAGW say yes.

Is spending money on the YMCA wasteful?  Maybe, but could CAGW be influenced just a bit by the fact that they lobby on behalf of the International Health, Racquet and Sportsclub Association?

To CAGW, the antitrust case against Microsoft was waste.  Surprise, surprise--they are paid lobbyists for Microsoft.

How do they determine when the taxpayer loses or wins?  According to your cite, the failed amendment offered by Coburn to force Amtrak to submit quarterly reports on food & beverage sales is a loss to the taxpayer.  Why?  Wouldn't those reports be excessive government regulation?  Is healthcare for children really "waste"?  Clean water?

I am sure that I could find many, many liberal organizations that paint McCain voting record as less than stellar.

[we vs us]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

Speaking of willful ignorance, did you bother to look into either of your candidate's voting records on wasteful projects or pork in general?

Neither Obama nor Biden have seen a pork project that didn't give them wood.

Ignorance is bliss I suppose.

Actually, yeah, I've seen a lot of what Obama's voted for.  

I think you and I have very different definitions of pork.

[iplaw]

Waste is in the eye of the beholder, but from their voting records, it doesn't appear that anything is "waste" to this man.  No government project should go unfunded, unless it's troops on the ground in combat...

Can you point to anything in Obama's record that would assure anyone that he plans on being fiscally responsible?  Where has he ever taken a stand on wasteful spending?  Where has he shown leadership in Illinois or the Senate to cut wasteful government spending>

Obama plans on close to a trillion dollars in new spending over the next ten years.  In that same amount of time, if his policies are implemented, the deficit would increase by 3.4 trillion dollars by conservative estimates.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

Speaking of willful ignorance, did you bother to look into either of your candidate's voting records on wasteful projects or pork in general?

Neither Obama nor Biden have seen a pork project that didn't give them wood.

Ignorance is bliss I suppose.

Actually, yeah, I've seen a lot of what Obama's voted for.  

I think you and I have very different definitions of pork.

Where has Obama shown any fiscal restraint?

If you support his voting record with the pork bills outlined in the document I linked to, then you have no business complaining about deficits and fiscal responsibility of any politician, but I highly doubt you bothered to read it.

[pmcalk]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

Waste is in the eye of the beholder, but from their voting records, it doesn't appear that anything is "waste" to this man.  No government project should go unfunded, unless it's troops on the ground in combat...

Can you point to anything in Obama's record that would assure anyone that he plans on being fiscally responsible?  Where has he ever taken a stand on wasteful spending?  Where has he shown leadership in Illinois or the Senate to cut wasteful government spending>

Obama plans on close to a trillion dollars in new spending over the next ten years.  In that same amount of time, if his policies are implemented, the deficit would increase by 3.4 trillion dollars by conservative estimates.

We could start with the Iraq war.

[Hoss]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

Speaking of willful ignorance, did you bother to look into either of your candidate's voting records on wasteful projects or pork in general?

Neither Obama nor Biden have seen a pork project that didn't give them wood.

Ignorance is bliss I suppose.

Actually, yeah, I've seen a lot of what Obama's voted for.  

I think you and I have very different definitions of pork.

Where has Obama shown any fiscal restraint?

If you support his voting record with the pork bills outlined in the document I linked to, then you have no business complaining about deficits and fiscal responsibility of any politician, but I highly doubt you bothered to read it.

Just because he didn't vote for pork doesn't mean he didn't help enable Wall Street and this current meltdown with his support of de-regulation.  Economists point to that (dereg) as a prime reason this has happened.

So now he is in favor of regulatory measures but was against them before?  Is he taking a page from his running mate?

[Gaspar]

Hey, I'm listening to Obama right now.  He's talking about how he's the true crusader against earmarks.

He just said that he didn't request a single earmark for 2008.  The crowd is cheering, screaming, fainting and some are letting out little whimpers and tears of joy.

Again, I have to simply reefer to his senate website where he must disclose all of his earmarks, and I get close to a Billion dollars of crazy wild earmarks.

http://obama.senate.gov/press/070621-obama_announces_3/

So how can he stand in front of a crowd of people and make such statements.  Do these folks have no internet, or do they just blindly follow?

I don't get it.  What's the deal?

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by Hoss

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

Speaking of willful ignorance, did you bother to look into either of your candidate's voting records on wasteful projects or pork in general?

Neither Obama nor Biden have seen a pork project that didn't give them wood.

Ignorance is bliss I suppose.

Actually, yeah, I've seen a lot of what Obama's voted for.  

I think you and I have very different definitions of pork.

Where has Obama shown any fiscal restraint?

If you support his voting record with the pork bills outlined in the document I linked to, then you have no business complaining about deficits and fiscal responsibility of any politician, but I highly doubt you bothered to read it.

Just because he didn't vote for pork doesn't mean he didn't help enable Wall Street and this current meltdown with his support of de-regulation.  Economists point to that (dereg) as a prime reason this has happened.

So now he is in favor of regulatory measures but was against them before?  Is he taking a page from his running mate?

Pretending that regulation would have solved, or is going to solve our problems is akin to those who believe that gun bans keep guns out of the hands of criminals.  It defies common sense and only serves to cripple law abiding entities.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Hoss

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

Speaking of willful ignorance, did you bother to look into either of your candidate's voting records on wasteful projects or pork in general?

Neither Obama nor Biden have seen a pork project that didn't give them wood.

Ignorance is bliss I suppose.

Actually, yeah, I've seen a lot of what Obama's voted for.  

I think you and I have very different definitions of pork.

Where has Obama shown any fiscal restraint?

If you support his voting record with the pork bills outlined in the document I linked to, then you have no business complaining about deficits and fiscal responsibility of any politician, but I highly doubt you bothered to read it.

Just because he didn't vote for pork doesn't mean he didn't help enable Wall Street and this current meltdown with his support of de-regulation.  Economists point to that (dereg) as a prime reason this has happened.

So now he is in favor of regulatory measures but was against them before?  Is he taking a page from his running mate?

Does the name Chris Dodd ring a bell?  Barack Obama?  Largest benefactors of contributions from AIG, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac.

The Dems had two years in power to help avert this mess.  They didn't do anything except pump a bunch of horse squeeze the last couple of weeks that this is all Bush's fault.

Important DNC backers and fund-raisers like John Paulson and George Soros, have made billions betting on the collapse of the mortgage and home markets as we know it.  

Follow the money trail and the greed.  Why would anyone in their right mind support a candidate backed by people who are profiting off the misery of others by design.  It's sick.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by pmcalk

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

Waste is in the eye of the beholder, but from their voting records, it doesn't appear that anything is "waste" to this man.  No government project should go unfunded, unless it's troops on the ground in combat...

Can you point to anything in Obama's record that would assure anyone that he plans on being fiscally responsible?  Where has he ever taken a stand on wasteful spending?  Where has he shown leadership in Illinois or the Senate to cut wasteful government spending>

Obama plans on close to a trillion dollars in new spending over the next ten years.  In that same amount of time, if his policies are implemented, the deficit would increase by 3.4 trillion dollars by conservative estimates.

We could start with the Iraq war.

Wow.  He doesn't mind voting for studying the ejaculatory habits of Equadorial gnat flies, but he votes to de-fund troops in a war zone.  Good point...